Home » Commentary » Win 100 Battles With No Losses

Win 100 Battles With No Losses

By Dean Cheng Friday, November 13th, 2009 11:38 am
Posted in Commentary, International, Policy

With President Obama heading to China as part of his sweep through Asia, it’s a good time to assess the recent and groundbreaking visit of Gen. Xu Caihou, the Chinese equivalent of the defense secretary to America. The Chinese put on a full-court propaganda press, filled with images of PLA troops helping the afflicted and laced with declarations of China’s peaceful intentions. We turned to Dean Cheng, one of the top analysts on the Chinese military who recently joined the right-wing Heritage Foundation, for his more independent assessment.

The headline is from the patron saint of military theory, Sun Tzu and was suggested by Cheng. Here’s the full quote:

“So it is said that if you know your enemies and know yourself, you can win a hundred battles without a single loss.
If you only know yourself, but not your opponent, you may win or may lose.
If you know neither yourself nor your enemy, you will always endanger yourself.”

As the PLA broadens its reach and global presence, the potential of increased friction between American and Chinese forces has steadily increased. This is exacerbated by the opacity of Chinese military and security decision-making. At the same time, there are few mechanisms to promote better understanding.

The opportunity to redress this occurred with the recent visit of General Xu Caihou, vice chairman of the Central Military Commission (CMC) of the Chinese People’s Liberation Army (PLA) to the United States. According to the People’s Liberation Army Daily, the official newspaper of the PLA, the purpose of the visit was to strengthen Sino-US military cooperation. During his 12-day stay, he met with various US military and government leaders in Washington, and visited Pacific Command, Strategic Command, as well as several major U.S. military bases.

In remarks at the Center for Strategic and International Studies in Washington, DC, and elsewhere, Xu emphasized the need for ongoing Sino-US military-to-military contacts. Xu also noted a general need for greater dialogue between the two sides in order to minimize the potential for dangerous misunderstandings.

Both the United States and the PRC saw the visit as a chance to send messages to the other side’s senior political and military leadership. For the United States, the visit provided an opportunity to air several concerns. One is the ongoing Chinese military build-up, especially opposite Taiwan. Given the American commitment to maintaining stability in the Taiwan Straits, the growing array of Chinese ballistic missiles, some of which are designed to target American carriers, is an obvious source of concern.

Linked to this is the issue of transparency. While the PRC has been more forthcoming of late, issuing bi-annual defense white papers that have significantly expanded the range of official information available regarding the PLA, much remains opaque. In particular, Chinese security decision-making continues to be a mystery.

This is of particular salience given recent episodes involving US maritime surveillance ships and at least one involving a US destroyer. Chinese ships, both military and civilian, have operated in ways that endangered both sides, yet the Chinese have ignored the Military Maritime Consultative Agreement (MMCA), which was established in 1998 to provide a venue for discussing precisely such types of events. Questions about who authorized these actions, and whom to call in the event of a more serious incident akin to the 2001 EP-3 collision, remain unanswered.

From the Chinese perspective, these incidents are also topics for bilateral discussion, but for wholly different reasons. As Xu made clear in his public remarks, the PRC wants the United States to withdraw its maritime surveillance vessels and reconnaissance flights from China’s Exclusive Economic Zone (EEZ), in order to avoid any further repetition of these close calls. This echoes the line that the Chinese government began to enunciate earlier this year, and which Chinese military officers reiterated to Undersecretary of Defense Michele Flournoy during her visit in June. From the Chinese perspective, US naval vessels and military aircraft have no right to operate within China’s 200-mile EEZ.

At the same time that China is increasingly assertive about controlling its EEZ, it is also expanding its regional and global presence. Chinese naval forces are now beginning their fourth rotation in anti-piracy patrols off the Horn of Africa. Meanwhile, nearer to home, China is quietly emphasizing in bilateral talks with its southern neighbors its claims to the South China Sea. Coupled with reports of the refurbishment of the ex-Russian carrier Varyag, as well as the open display of new weapons and systems in the October 1 National Day parade through (and above) downtown Beijing, it is clear that the PLA is going to be more visible and more active.

To dispel any notion of a China threat, Xu’s visit also sought to convey the image of a “kinder, gentler” PLA. Thus, Xu concluded his CSIS presentation with a 30-minute video detailing the role of the PLA in the wake of the 2008 Sichuan earthquake. The film, complete with flawless English narration, emphasizes the role of the PLA in rescue and relief operations.

What may be less well understood is that Xu’s visit, including the video presentation, is an implicit restatement of the “new historic missions” that Hu Jintao and Jiang Zemin charged the PLA with fulfilling. As set forth in a speech by Hu Jintao in December 2004, the PLA is charged with:

• Ensuring military support for continuing rule by the Chinese Communist Party
• Defending Chinese sovereignty, territorial integrity, and national security
• Protecting China’s expanding national interests, including at sea and in space
• Promoting a peaceful global environment

These missions provide an indication of likely areas of PLA growth and emphasis, as the military shifts its focus beyond the Taiwan Straits. Xu’s comments are consistent with this more expansive set of tasks. As such, Xu’s visit is also a clear signal to Western observers that the PLA will exert a growing presence, not just regionally, but globally.

The question for both sides is: How was their message received?

Share |

Join the Conversation

	CharlesHouston November 13th, 2009 at 7:06 pm As an outside observer, I see some odd things happening in the PLA. Several years ago they had a MiG pilot who intercepted a P-3 Orion and stupidly ran into it — killing himself and causing the P-3 to land in China. How much of that was choreographed by the leadership? Possibly they told interceptors to get more aggressive but they did not figure their folks would end up with the fish while the US crew were in the guest house! The leadership must be telling their naval folks to do the same thing — get aggressive, get in the way of US ships, etc. But if they want to get aggressive — shouldn’t they improve their equipment and training? It was the MiG pilot that ended up sleeping with the carp. They are far more accepting of losses than we are, but their military still consists mostly of targets. I think that is why Gen Chilton encourages us to not provoke them — to maintain US technological superiority. Let’s not wake up the sleeping hippo!
	Byron Skinner November 13th, 2009 at 2:19 pm Good Morning Folks, Gee I don’t know where to start in this work of fiction. A lot of false generalizations, with no data support, it’s a good thing that the Heritage foundation neocoms who one said that overthrowing Saddam would pay for itself, and 60K troops would do just find in taking control of Iraq is not advising President Obama. These same folks yelled treason/sell out form the roof tops when President Obama closed down the European Missile Defense program, but didn’t have a word to say when Russia with drew all of their short/medium/long range ballistic missiles that were facing the EU. If the Chinese are willing to pay the price, like the stabilization of North Korea, resolving Tibet, and pulling back the 1500 mostly aging D-3’s,D-5’s and a few newer D-15’s from being pointed at Taiwan that the removal of the interceptors from Alaska and California would be possible. He could do Vandenberg AFB first as a token of good faith to the PRC. There would be a domestic political price to pay, FOX (I have dropped the term new from FOX since it is no longer a legitimate news organization) would have story material for a year or longer, but most if not all of those who would be upset are not going to vote Democratic in 2010 or for President Obama in 21012 anyway. To any of you who want to discuss any of Dean Cheng’s statements, the CMC, the PLAN, Space, AWAC’s or what ever, including Mr. Cheng himself, in words that all of you should understand, “Bring it on.” Mr. Cheng’s statements are nothing more then right wing wingers red meat propaganda. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	The Other FSB November 13th, 2009 at 9:03 pm I think Byron Skinner should have read Cheng’s piece first before posting his inexplicable, and frankly poorly written, diatribe. Cheng’s piece is well written and cogent. While I am sure there a number of points raised by Cheng that may be eminently arguable, they are far from outlandish or controversial. Far from being a ‘work of fiction’, Cheng offers a plausible analysis. If only Skinner could offer us something in return. Byron Skinner (if that is indeed his or her name) would have been better served by taking on the issues made by Cheng. Instead, Skinner has given us a splenetic outburst that makes little sense, casts dubious assertions, invokes stereotypical right-wing conspiracies, and frankly reads like the response of some rabid Chinese nationalist barely able to contain himself.
	roland November 13th, 2009 at 10:05 pm My mistake. 200 mile is the special economic zone. So why are the Russians subs oftenly inside our 200 (EEZ)mile zone, oftenly?
	Byron Skinner November 13th, 2009 at 6:33 pm Good Afternoon The Other FSB, I assume that your named you FSB since you questioned my name, she must have been a very odd lady. Unlike people who are to ashamed of their name or to cowardly to use their name and refuse to use it when posting, I’m not. Since you say FSB, you are capable of discerning some point)s) of argument out of Mr. Cheng’s essay, please enlighten me as I am not able to. The EEZ are zones of economic interest, which the UN says is a 100 miles, or the geologic continental shelf which ever is smaller, China is claiming 200 miles, it has nothing to do with the rights of passage in international waters but only the islands and mineral/oil/gas deposits that may be on the sea bed. China’s claim here which it also calls it first island line are based on geography and historical claims. On the issue of Taiwan both China and Japan have historical based claims to the island. Other then on the South China sea where China has a large PLAN presence on Hainan Island and there are no other countries in the are that can compete with China on the water it is doubtful that China could exercise its claims against either Japan or South Korea. What of Mr. Cheng’s arguments FSB do you plausible? Just to humor you FSB, I’ll bite and challenge Mr. Cheng’s opening sentence; “As the PLA broadens its reach and global preseence…” the rest of the sentence is about increased “friction” between America and China, which utter nonsense. So please tell me FSB where has the PLA expanded it’s reach beyond the Chinese mainland, are they going to invade the EU, Canada, or any other non bordering area that is of historic dispute, in say in the past ten years. The fact that President Obama is visiting China negates the rest of the statement. But I am curious FSB where has the PLA broadened it reach? One thing I do find odd FSB, among many about the Heritage mentality, is that they are all for capitalists open markets, free trade, international investment as are the Chinese, who are a major buyer of Bush incurred debt at 3–3.5%, they want to nuke em. This doesn’t make sense why nuke the country that is bailing us out of the neocon mess that President Obama is so skillfully getting the country out from under. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	dave November 13th, 2009 at 11:47 pm Skinner sadly infest these boards with his paranoid nutjob rants. Take your meds!
	TMB November 14th, 2009 at 12:28 am “neocon mess that President Obama is so skillfully getting the country out from under. Um, Byron, you know that Obama as a senator voted for most of the spending bills Bush put on the table right? And that as senator and president he voted for all the bailouts, spending bills, and is now pushing this insanely expensive health care bill? If he’s “skillfully” getting the country out from under Bush’s mess, why has the national debt gone up at least a trillion dollars since he took office and this year is the biggest deficit in history? Getting back on track, you challenged the first statement of the PLA’s reach. The PLA has conducted joint maneuvers with a couple of its neighbors in the last few years and the Chinese Navy is patrolling around Somalia with the rest of the world’s navies.
	roland November 13th, 2009 at 9:12 pm I think this is dangerous. 200 mile? I thought its only 100 mile is required for each country for its economic zone. Russia usally violate the 100 mile, while drdging on the pacific. The Chinese is beginning to give us the gibees. This is one of the reasons why we need to be prepared.Who knows what they are brewing next.
	Daniel Russ November 14th, 2009 at 2:23 am Technically it was not a MIG that ran into the EP-3A Aries Maritime Patrol aircraft. It was a Shenyang J-8 Finback. Respectfully, Daniel Russ Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup.com
	Byron Skinner November 13th, 2009 at 10:43 pm Good Evening TMB, You must be referring to joint training exercises both Naval and Ground with Russia and a Naval exercise with Pakistan and South East Asian countries that are customers of China for military hardware. This is China extending its borders and reach and global presence. Naw not even in the wildest neocons dream. Regarding Somalia, China has long standing territorial claims and rights in East Africa dating to the Ming Dynasty (1368–1644). The largest US deficit in US history is the eight years of Cheney/Bush. I guess you forget that the US Governments year runs from October 1st to September 30th. We just finished Bush’s last year in office. How quickly you forget that VP Chiney said “Deficits don’t matter.” and how can we forget in the late summer of 2008 the Republicans favorite Phd Economist, former Texas Senator Phil Gram, said that the US Economy was in good shape. President Obama is doing a great job of shoveling up the night soil that Chiney/Bush left. Good evening Daniel, your confusing the wingers with facts. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	roland November 14th, 2009 at 2:40 pm 100 battles? They must be refering to Genghis Khan. Wonder if they have known George Armstrong Custer.
	Rey November 14th, 2009 at 2:41 pm Byron skipped his “happy pills’” again. What a tool! Are you affiliated with the disgraced White House Press Secretary as you insult FOX NEWS?
	CharlesHouston November 14th, 2009 at 3:39 pm Daniel — very true and I should have caveated my statement. After going back and looking at Wikipedia, there were several versions called the J-8 — one based on the MiG 21, one based on the Sukhoi Su-15, and even one based on the MiG 23. I am not sure which version P-3, but in any case it does seem to demonstrate the lack of attention to detail of the pilot! In the middle of this snippy discussion we should remember that even if the Chinese are getting more aggressive — their equipment, training, command, etc seems mired in the 1960s! A more aggressive China that provides targets for Japanese (or American) pilots is not gonna extend too much influence. I would dearly love to see a pair of Japanese Self Defense Force F-15s come up against a group of Chinese fighters.
	Byron Skinner November 14th, 2009 at 3:13 pm Good Morning Folks, It seems other then personal attacks no one is willing to defend this piece from The Heritage Foundation. So just for S–ts and giggles I will argue with the article just fort he hell of it, it’s a slow day. One rather interesting statement of Mr. Cheng’s is regarding aircraft carriers, he says: “…with reports of the refurbishment of the ex Russian carrier Varyag,…” “The Varyag, a unit in the Soviets newest and largest of aircraft carriers, is equipped with a ‘Ski Jump’ bow to facilitate fixed-wing aircraft Operations. Its construction began in a Ukrainian shipyard in 1985; the 1989 collapse of the Soviet Union halted construction (20) years ago,…As a result of (the) long period of inactivity, the hulls and decks must heavily corroded, the propulsion machinery seriously deteriorated, and the installed weapons and sensors, if still installed, (the Varyag is) beyond repair.” “Recent press reports advocating a PLAN carrier usually described a forty-fifty ton displacement ship, perhaps similar to the French-built Charles De Gualle, as part of a special PLA construction program designated the “998 Plan”. The carriers would probably constructed in China, since the only non-American shipyard with experience in constructing (more than fifty thousand tons) aircraft carriers is the Chenormorsky facility in Ukrainian, which has no carrier orders, no obvious prospects, and thus no active work force… None of the re[pots of PLAN carrier acquisition have been confirmed and there is no evidence that carrier construction is either underway or planned for the immediate future.” “It is very unlikely that China will build an aircraft carrier in this Century.” Mr. Cheng’s contention of China refitting the Varyag is totally fictitious without any bases in fact. The Varyag currently has a fresh paint job and is as the Chines call an amusement attraction. A private equity group has shown an interest in the Varag and would move it to Maco and outfit the Varyag is as a hotel/casino. Strange, but maybe some folks are turned on by sleeping in and old Soviet warship. This would give new meaning to the Island Restaurant. One thing the Chines can and do really well is paint jobs and dressing up antique military hardware as their recent 60th Anniversary parade showed. The digital cammo paint jobs with the Red Star outlined in white or gold on spit polished Type 059 tanks and did anyone catch those white sidewall road wheels, major cool. The old 50’s style white side walls on the missile carries that had empty shipping containers on them was a class touch. But the shining moment of the parade was of course the marching female soldiers in short skirts and calf high boots, goose stepping with Type-081–1 across their ample chests, this is the stuff that make American wingers and birthers head for their bottle of blood pressure pills. I’m surprised that Heritage has not come to defend this article, I would guess that sense they are a business that peddles political influence for defense companies and mentor the careers of military (you gotta love that Clinton era 1996 law, that defense lobbyist got through congress, that prohibits the DoD from tracking post career employment of retired military officers, who say there is no free lunch) and bureaucrats with promises of seven figure retirement incomes for a few little billion of dollar for favors now, would not at least try and explain themselves. The last thing is that The Heritage Foundation by posting an article such as this under the by line of a Chinese/American name is being rather racist. The assumption that simply because of a Chinese surname (in the wrong order) makes Mr. Cheng any kind of a creditable expert on China is highly insulting to the Chinese. This is no different that a hundred years ago articles appeared in popular magazines by reported ex-slave that lamented the passing of slavery and the good of days of bondage. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	Daniel Russ November 15th, 2009 at 12:45 am You know that if a couple of Chinese intelligence planes began tracing the California coastline, a couple of F-15s would be on their butts in short order. I think we have to keep in mind that sovereign nations might take umbrage at these sorts of incursions, technically legal or not. I believe China and the US have more in common right now than the other way around. And I hope we can move forward without provoking a shooting war. Respectfully, Daniel Russ Civilianmilitaryintelligencegroup.com
	CharlesHouston November 15th, 2009 at 2:37 am As an alumni of NORAD, certainly I will agree that the US has been very enthusiastic about following Soviet Bear (etc) bombers on Show The Flag/intell collection missions. So that is not surprising at all, to see that sort of behavior. My statements have more in common with Byron Skinner, who correctly points out that the Chinese are talking big but have not upgraded their military to a true Blue Water fleet. They have not trained to be a power projection force — was it about 20 years ago that they have some serious shooting between the PLA and the Vietnamese army, and the PLA did not perform well. The Chinese have not laid aside the traditions of the guerrilla army that they once were. And I don’t wish a shooting war on anyone (most especially us!) but it would be a academically interesting match between the very efficient Japanese — with F-15s — and a numerically superior Chinese PLA air squadron. It would likely be about the same as when the Israeli Air Force came up against the Syrians in Lebanon. Resulting in a very lopsided victory for the IAF. The Chinese may be an economic powerhouse but so far they are not a military powerhouse. That of course could change!! I think that General Chilton would like to see the sleeping Chinese not be provoked.
	Byron Skinner November 14th, 2009 at 10:54 pm Good Evening Daniel, I don’t disagree with you, any Chinese military aircraft flying along the US west coast or near Hawaii, Alaska, Guam, Saipan, Tarawa, etc. would draw the attention of US interceptors and a suitable escort would be provided for them. That said the longest range aircraft has is the Il76, the Il-76 was the airframe of China’s one and only AWACS, until it flew into a mountain and killed 40 aboard, which included all the engineers and technicians who knew anything about AWACS or and other airborne C4ISR platforms, and un-refueled a trip to the US west coast and back to where PLAAF refueling tankers operating from mainland China could meet the Il-76 is very unlikely, such a trip is out side the range of any Chinese military aircraft. and beyond the capabilities of the Il-76. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	Semper Fidelis November 15th, 2009 at 2:57 pm Does anybody else suspect that the handle “Byron Skinner” was cooked up by some central planning committee in China? Only that sort could possibly dream up a name like that.
	Byron Skinner November 15th, 2009 at 10:03 pm Good Evening Semper Fidelis, Sorry wrong, most likely I killed more communists in Vietnam then you can name. so stuff in your sea bag. I would say that if your were a Marine you lack even the courage to use your name when making personal attacks. How manny commies have you killed Semper Fidelis? I’m just sick of war and right wing chicken hawkes bill sh–ers that never had the guts to stand up and fight for their country, I’m talking about the Army 11B’s here not the REMF’s. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	Peter M November 16th, 2009 at 4:18 am The statement that “the largest US deficit in US history is the eight years of Cheney/Bush” makes no sense at all. The deficit is the fiscal year difference between what the Government takes in from taxes and other revenues, called receipts, and the amount of money the Government spends, called outlays. Perhaps it could be said that “the largest deficits in US history were the eight years of Cheney/Bush” but I wont bother to fact check something which is not asserted. In any case Obama is a spendthrift. The deficit for fiscal year 2009 (mostly Obama’s), which ended Sept. 30, came in at a record $1.42 trillion, more than triple the record set just last year.
	Peter M November 16th, 2009 at 4:50 am Your information on the Varyag is old and misunderstood. Subsequent to the purchase by a Hong Kong based company with connections to the PRC the Hull was moved to Dalian. In 2007 she was located at 38°56’30.00“N 121°38’41.09“E. More recently China is in early stage negotiations to buy up to 50 Su-33 — carrier based aircraft. Whether China has the capacity to deploy power projection is another matter entirely but to say that “Mr. Cheng’s contention of China refitting the Varyag is totally fictitious without any bases in fact” is just silly.
	William C. November 16th, 2009 at 4:53 am Has Byron Skinner always been a leftist madman foaming at his mouth about the EVIL Fox News and conservatives? For God’s sake man, do you work for the White House press department? It is as if you are looking for any reason to justify continued cuts to our military structure and organization, not to mention new equipment. Liberals.….. China has played rough in the recent past, has interests that conflict with those of the United States, and have been quite “aggressive” when it comes to fields like cyber warfare and space assets. They clearly want to challenge us on a technological level, and are going to pour plenty of money into defense and R&D to do so. We must meet this challenge. Full blown conventional or nuclear war with the PRC may be unlikely, but we must prepare for that possibility as well.
	SkysoldierRecon November 16th, 2009 at 2:05 pm i could give a rats azz about wat those Chi-coms say: I DON’T TRUST THEM..they really have studied Sun Tzu well…lulling us to sleep..
	SkysoldierRecon November 16th, 2009 at 2:06 pm You mean “Cluster Fox..??”.// LOL!!! Fair and balanced? Hardy har har!!!! IDIOTS
	pennst98 November 16th, 2009 at 2:48 pm No, but i do suspect that Semper Fidelis never served a hour in uniform and probably works with the right wing bloggers who the GOP pays to troll message boards in an attempt to shut down debate. If you don’t have any information or opinions that weren’t fed you by your handlers, do us all a favor and go somewhere else. I may not agree with Skinner on everything, but at least he speaks in coherent sentences and bases his opinion on information he’s willing to share. It is a sad day when any coward can impune someone’s patriotism or intelligence without ever addressing the merits of their argument or providing any alternative analysis.…
	pennst98 November 16th, 2009 at 3:04 pm Um.….in what way is Robert Gibbs disgraced?? I mean if this guy is disgraced for pointing out the obvious then what does that make former VP Cheney after selling out our intelligence community? What does that make the former President for screwing up two wars and our economy simultaneously? What does that make GOP?! They’ve got more convicted child molesters, johns, and batcrap weirdos than hell can handle and Robert Gibbs is “disgraced”.…..WHEW…you’ve got nerve.
	Bumblebee November 16th, 2009 at 3:09 pm Sun Tzu also wrote many other things that are useful for making War. Alot of it is useful in peacetime as well when you are thinking of trying to do things with your own resources. Reading the comments, one life does not matter to China if that is what happened to place the US Spy plane out of options and at mercy of Sir Issac Newton on Chinese Territory. Remember that it is not a problem for thousands of Chinese to storm a hill in Korea knowing there isn’t enough ammunition available to kill them all. One life does not matter. Now a thousand lives working together will matter. Here, the USA will have to send 1000 people to training 6 months, replace half of them due to many reasons and maybe a year from now have them ready to do something. Never mind Sun Tzu, we have enough difficulty working with each other and taking the USA in a useful direction.
	NeoConVet November 16th, 2009 at 6:18 pm I gather from the Article that the visiting (intel gathering?) ChiCom General learned a lot more than we did. He is learning about his enemy, did we? Economically they are tied to us via markets and now devalued Treasury notes of actually being dumb enough to buy our debt! Not mentioned is the great decline in our manufacturing capacity and our dependene of foreign nation sourcing for everything from boots, uniforms (remember the black berea fiasco), ammunition (sourcing 5.56 from Canada, etc) and many electroni components no longer made in quantity here. So that implies that if we have to fight China… we had better order supplies in advance!
	Colonial-Marine November 16th, 2009 at 6:28 pm Go watch some MSNBC you zombie.
	Colonial-Marine November 16th, 2009 at 6:29 pm What is a useful direction? It is certainly not the way we are going. NeoConVet is right that we need to fix this trend of relying on them for so much of our national needs.
	Colonial-Marine November 16th, 2009 at 6:35 pm Pointing out the obvious? CNN and MSNBC are just as biased if not more so and defending Obamas continued mistakes by blaming everything on Bush is simply pathetic. The GOP? Lets talk about the corrupt idiots, creeps, and degenerates of the Democrat party that you evidently have no problem with. Short sighted fools like yourself who want one-party rule by the Democrats sicken me. Go try to ruin a different nation.
	Colonial-Marine November 16th, 2009 at 6:40 pm A typical liberal drone who thinks they are being an individual by preaching the same old “Obama can do no harm”, “GOP is evil”, “blame Bush”, and “cut defense” nonsense shouldn’t be accusing people of being forum plants. You actually think the GOP is paying people to troll message boards on a minor defense news site? Your insane.
	Byron Skinner November 16th, 2009 at 2:51 pm Good Morning Folks, First off for Willaim C., it saddens me that the Conservatives have so little factual content to support their positions on many matters especially China. I’m a liberal and damn proud of it, I post under my own name, but I am dismayed that Conservatives don’t have the moral courage to do the same. Other then childish personal attacks behind fictitious names conservative are void of any intellectual content to their arguments. Peter M. Most likely the Varyag right now is serving as an engineering study classroom for the PLAN and shipbuilders. I saw a photo of the Varyag awhile back and it was riding really high in the water, it would appear that the Russians either removed the engineering (boiler, turbines, reduction gears etc) or they were never installed,the current paint job appears to have lower the water line to make this less apparent) if thats the case the Varyag would have to have considerable disassembly to be an active ship. The Su-33’s have been kicked around for at least 10 years. China does have a carrier flight deck outlined on an airfield where some of it 24 Su-30 have been seen doing touch and go. If China had an interest in a Carriers, which I really doubt personally, the French Mistral Class LHD (21.3 Kilo ton.) would be a viable economic and military option rather then trying to rebuild an old Russian haul or building carriers from scratch. At 300–400 Million Euros they are a bargain, to be a player China would have to buy at least three in order to keep one LHD operational most of the times as well their order for Su-33’s would have to be increased to about a hundred as well as AH helicopters and increase their PLANM from 30K to at least 60K. China does have a very strong military/economic relationship with France. Such a move as outlined above would greatly increase China’s presence of it’s South Seas fleet in what is perhaps it’s most important area of national and economic interest. If China could build a battle group around these LHD’s with capable destroyers and frigates they would be able to participate with the US, Japan and NATO in Naval exercises and in world wide peace keeping operations and get some much coveted some Blue Water status. It is noted that regional rival India is considering the purchase of a Mistral Class LHD, with licensing to build their own, Russia is also trying to cut a deal with France (energy credits as payment) as well most like to serve with the Black Sea Fleet. The really big question is China will to invest about 3 billion Euros in a small carrier project. Their preference in weapons systems has been to buy cheap aging or second tier platforms, in small numbers, and attempting to boost their effectiveness with third country technology/weapons from countries such as Israel, France, Switzerland, Germany etc. China’s attempts at reverse engineering have mostly been a bust. So far China has backed away from any deal as big as the French LDS’s would be for defense modernization. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	William C. November 17th, 2009 at 12:04 am Byron Skinner you seem reasonable enough to realize that criticism on Fox News is ill founded when you look at the rest of the media. My father always joked that you can get your news in two flavors, and it is still true today, Fox News happens to lean towards the right while CNN and MSNBC are left leaning. The same is true for various think tanks, yet I don’t think you should dismiss all of the studies done by the Heritage Foundation because they are admittedly conservative. As far as names goes, remember that this is the internet. In such a cesspool of humanity there are many reasons for people to use a name they created, and it is neither cowardly or childish. There are several liberals who post here under false names, and there are anti-American idiots with false names on related sites like Defense Tech as well. DoDBuzz has a long way to go before being something like Janes or so-forth, so you should expect the commentary to be rather lousy. Now I am sure you have figured out I am a conservative but regardless of your political and social views, the Chinese are not to be underestimated. They don’t want war, but they certainly want to become the leading superpower, and in the coming years are going to demonstrate that by building a true blue-water navy, more space developments, and modernizing their military forces. I believe we should meet this challenge.
	elgatoso November 17th, 2009 at 1:01 am I am not liberal but any media outlet that have beck in his staff should be criticized.And I put beck in lower case because I not gonna write this guy name in capital .
	elgatoso November 17th, 2009 at 1:06 am BTW,I agree with you that they certainly want to become the leading superpower,and they are looking for a way to become the leading superpower without going in a conventional weapons race against us ‚but looking for holes in our type of military development
	Byron Skinner November 16th, 2009 at 10:49 pm Good Evening William C. First off, the “…cesspool of humanity…” that you refer to are just as American as anybody else and deserve to have their view aired. From that cesspool comes the taxes that pay for all the useless military contract that are promoted by “conservative think tanks” like Heritage Foundation, which is nothing more then transfer of income from the working and middle classes to the wealthy equity holder of defense corporations, who pay these “think tanks” to peddle their good to corrupted congressmen, bureaucrats and career military officers whos careers they promote and promise seven and eight figure retire incomes. Also from the “…cesspool of humanity…“come the men and women who serve in our armed forces. If you have an opinion and don’t have the guts to put your name on it you are a coward. Being liberal is not being anti American, I’m a liberal and also served my country as an Infantryman, and to answer your question, no I was not drafted my serial number prefix was RA, something that I find few “conservatives” had the guts to do either in my generation or of todays generation. The commentary is no worse or any better then that found in the American work place, at family picnics, at the neighborhood taverns, at a University etc. It is American and unlike Conservatives I as a Liberal think it all deserved a forum. Yes William I think even the crap that comes out of the Heritage Foundation and other winger think tanks and FOX deserves to be aired. I noticed William that you lack the courage to use your full name. What’s wrong? I do not underestimate the Chinese but do look at the realistically. China may someday again such as in the Ming Dynasty one again have a Blue Water Navy but I doubt in this century. China has some overwhelming domestic situations that must be addressed long before they can commit funds to building a military that would make them even a near competitor to the United States. FOX supports Rush Limbaugh who has said it his goal to make the Presidency of President Obama fail. I would suggest that in any other country that would be a treasonous statement and FOX would be actively engaged in supporting Treason. Personally I have no trouble of how Queen Elizabeth I dealt with traitors with those who supported them. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	elgatoso November 17th, 2009 at 12:33 am A good analisis,sir,like always.
	elgatoso November 17th, 2009 at 4:50 pm Respectfully,sir,I beg to differ with you in the statement about that China have a Blue Water Navy in this century,in 90 years I am sure that China will Have a Blue Water Navy.Me think that circa 2050 China gonna be the second navy in the world(or the third if my predictions about a Europe Navy come true)
	Byron Skinner November 17th, 2009 at 2:39 pm Good Morning elgatoso, You may very well be correct on your prediction of a Chinese Blue Water Navy by 2050. My estimate is based most on Chinas unwillingness to commit the funds to the PLAN at the expense of the other more dominate branched of their military. Navy’s are very expensive to build and ocean going fleets are very expensive to maintain. China to date has shown little interest in going beyond its 1st. Islands line of defense. ALLONS, Byron Skinner
	elgatoso November 17th, 2009 at 9:13 pm That’s sound logical,I never tough of that.
	William C. November 18th, 2009 at 5:06 am I was talking about the internet, not a country or a state. Taxes don’t come from the internet nor do the soldiers that serve in our armed forces. For every half decent website there is a dozen filled with utter garbage, and the commentary on the internet as a whole is anything but civil. As a whole all of the filth and madmen you could find with a quick search reflects how ****ed up society is. Even on civilized places like these you get your occasional nutjob who wouldn’t say such stupid things in public where he does not have the benefit of anonymity. Most of us including myself would rather not use our full names due to all of the craziness, the threat of identity theft, and the fact that one cannot verify anything. I have no proof you are who you say you are and this applies to everybody. You seem to think that conservatives don’t serve there country although the facts say different, many in the armed forces have more conservative viewpoints and aren’t’ ashamed to say so. In fact a majority of men in the armed forces didn’t vote for Dear Leader Obama. And I can’t blame them because for the last 20+ years, every time the Democrats come into power they hurt the state of our forces and defense and aerospace industries.
	Fong Wei November 19th, 2009 at 1:14 pm Thank You Comrade Skinner. You shall be rewarded once we have the USA firmly in our grasp. You are a hero of the Party.
	SkysoldierRecon November 19th, 2009 at 2:57 pm Better hope the young Chinese are able to implement change..same with Iran, though not as urgent. The Chi-comms wanna be even with us, so they will steal, hack, bribe..watever. DO NOT TRUST THEM. They have stripped the US of its industry, while vile pols and the “GORDON GEKKO’S” of US business make millions..while destroying the middle class..
	Semper Fi November 19th, 2009 at 6:56 pm This Marine served two tours in Vietnam and two tours in Afghanistan, and I am a conservative and proud of it. I was and still am a “Grunt”. I’ve seen the work of communists and socialists and the pragmantists and the stick the head in the hole ignorists. Bottom line is if we wait to stop the “Red Dragon” it will be more costly and maybe useless to succeed. Mao said we can loose a million people a day and still prevail in a war, would an American say that, no, because we value life and freedom. A government over 70 years ago wanted a Asia East co-prosperity realm and bombed Pearl Hartbor, the Chinese also want a Asia dominated by them. History repeats itself, and to sit on our laurels will only embolden them to proceed. I also don’t use my name, for reasons of my families security from the nut cases running around the internet.
	Jose J Clavell March 18th, 2010 at 10:33 am I agreed with Comrade Wei, you are a credit to the party.